Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : VALENCE TECHNOLOGY (VLNC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FMK who wrote (10693)	4/25/1999 11:26:00 AM
From: Mark Johnson	Respond to of 27311

FMK thanks for getting things back on track. Dennis was also on the right track by pointing out the diverse opinion on our thread. I'd like to see Zeev create an in depth analysis of the Valence patent portfolio and the potential value since he is most qualified, instead of wasting bandwith throwing bones to his lapdogs. The continued discussion of the reason for the participation of the Valence bashers is also healthy. Recognizing the afflictions of MGV, Larry, Zeev and others help us understand and work toward a remedy to purge evil, malice, and slander from our lives. Good Luck to all!!

To: FMK who wrote (10693)	4/25/1999 11:36:00 AM
From: Dennis V.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

Foreign interests, in particular, will do anything to sell product. This is a quasi- state priority and will be pursued by any available means a priori and irrespective of short term profit. These interests are transitioning to li poly, but in the meantime have large investments in canister li ion manufacturing equiment to amortize. The plan has been to wait and see while developing their own technology. The waiting revolves around the hope or expectation that Valence will founder financially and their patents can be stolen. Some nervousness has set in since this outcome is now in doubt. Market pressures are building for improved technology. Surveys of li poly potential predict 25% penetration of the rechargeable market in 3-4 years. Lev's recent trip to Asia would not have been undertaken without incentive. Indications are that some competitors will license technology if their own cannot be developed or cannot be acquired by other means. During this transition period, these interests will continue to maintain market share by dumping or other incentives...(use your imagination). At some point, there will be flashover as some intrepid or innovative OEM's introduce this product in earnest. Market resistance will give way to acceptance and serious offers to license Valence technology will ensue. The time frame for substantial revenues to Valence is 1-2 years.